NUMBER 6 SPRING 2001

EDITORIAL:
D!SSENT argues
there is
nothing new in Labor's parliamentary representatives under Kim Beazley
moving to
deny the ALP's egalitarian principles -
even in basic areas like health, education and taxation -
in order to make the party electable at any price. What has changed is
the
separation of power between the caucus, executive and party conference -
a separation put in place early in the ALP's life to check party
careerists.
Power is now concentrated in a small, self-perpetuating oligarchy,
achieved via
factionalism and branch stacks. The power structure of the ALP, as much
as
globalisation (or Labor's class enemies), is the real barrier to social
and
economic reform if Labor wins at the next election.

FRED
ARGY, former senior Treasury official and OECD ambassador,
argues that small
government ideology should not be mistaken for economic credibility.
Argy sets
out socially responsible and economically sensible policies (which
would not
upset global capital markets), and shows how a progressive government
committed
to egalitarian ideas would finance them.

GEOFFREY
BARKER
explains how John Howard has tried to exploit endemic racism,
unsuccessfully in
1988 and more successfully since 1996 when he refused to confront
Pauline
Hanson. This implicitly gave her racist attacks on Asians and
Aborigines a
respectability under the rubric of free speech and led to the creation
of One
Nation.

DAVID
HAYWARD and
RON ASPIN describe how contracting out prisons and public
transport to
foreign multinationals (on advice from multinational accountancy and
consulting
firms) is accelerating the process of globalisation, without the
service
delivery or cost savings originally promised.

DAVID
SALTER argues
that, in broadcasting policy, self-regulation is no regulation. Good
media law
should be drafted from the consumer's standpoint, not the proprietors
as it was
during the Hawke/Keating years.

IAN
MANNING points
out the
real test of the social security system will come when there is
contraction in
employment so that the cornerstone of the Howard Government's mutual
obligation -
the work test -
will become irrelevant.

JULIAN
DISNEY and
RICK KREVER discuss various tax reform proposals whose
objective is to
protect the revenue base, reinforce environmentally friendly activity,
avoid tax
competition between countries, and rein in concessions on capital
gains,
superannuation, and discretionary and off-shore trusts which mainly
accrue to
the rich.

DAVID
YENCKEN asks
why Australian governments cannot see that the adoption of
pro-environment
policies now will put Australia in the best possible position to
benefit from
the low energy, low material use and low waste economics of the future
and why
we should be following the example of progressive European countries.

IAN
McAULEY points
out that unless a future government is committed to restoring Medicare
it will
be faced with an unsustainable blowout in health costs, which will be
even more
electorally damaging than doing nothing.

BOB
BIRRELL argues
that associated with the increasing private costs of higher education
is a
fall-off in Australian university entrants, particularly in the skilled
IT area,
and the gap is being filled by full fee paying overseas students.

JOHN
M LEGGE and
BRIAN ELLIS each outline their vision of an industry policy
which a
future Australian government might adopt in order to avoid our
dependence on
commodity exports, because we can no longer sustain first world living
standards
with a third world export profile.

ARTHUR
CROOK agues
that Coalition IR policy tries to re-institute the C19th master/servant
act. He
shows its incompatibility with the needs of a modern industrial state
in which
competitiveness is based on innovation and quality enhancement (not
cost-cutting), and where cooperation and trust (not confrontation) are
stressed
in employer/employee relations.

BARBARA
PRESTON contends
that a calculated electoral auction has displaced the national good in
setting
national schools policy priorities and discusses what the outcome of
this might
be in the future when teacher shortages are likely to emerge.

BILL
RUSSELL points
out that the refusal of successive governments to invest in rail, while
pouring
record amounts into roads, has unnecessarily increased overall
transport costs.
Wasteful investment in roads undermines Australia's capacity to invest
in
schools and other high yielding social infrastructure.

NOTE
FOR EDITORS AND PRODUCERS: For
permission to reprint articles, or for interviews, contact Kenneth
Davidson or Lesley Vick on tel/fax 03 9347 7839 or email dissentmagazine@dissent.com.au

D!SSENT is
published 3 times a year, is available on
subscription and is on sale nationally at
newsagents and major bookshops.